Women wising up to the feminazi fraudsters and their devious DV lies and stats VIDEO

5 year old girl already showing signs of becoming a top feminist VIDEO

Feminists push for woman on American bill VIDEO

Patricia Arquette's feminist RANT at the Oscars VIDEO

Two 12 year old girls use 'Slender man' excuse for murdering friend VIDEO

How many more times will females use male (in this case a fictional male)
pressure to justify their actions?

BBC interviewee claims women should not be made to look victims of men VIDEO

Sex Lies And Rinsing Guys VIDEO

Brutal abuse by female staff against children in South Korean nursery VIDEO

And they claim they are the weaker sex?

The homopaedo warmongers pushing feminazi domestic abuse campaigns

Despite massive exposures recently by the gutter press, that are only repeating what many victims on the internet
have been exposing for decades, the scum and filth political establishment behind gross homopaedo abuse,
murder and its cover up and who also support warmongering by the British and American neocons are determined
to continue to ramp up the feminazi driven domestic violence mayhem.

Despite the fact that young boys in care homes en masse have been removed from those homes and abused
by the political establishment of Britain. Many of them in care homes after being removed from fathers under the
guise of domestic violence allegations these evil bastards continue to pursue policies that have driven men to
suicide and destroyed their lives while their children are abused and murdered by the very scum and filth
manufacturing ever more draconian laws. Laws that smear heterosexual men in family courts that still to this day
remain cloaked in secrecy and with little or no evidence offered by crooked lawyers on multi million pound legal aid
budgets acting for ex wives ONLY interested in golddigging and little concerned with the consequences of children
being removed from the physical protection of their biological father.

Many men who are yet to face these horrific hearing are totally unaware, thanks to endless propaganda, that they
are next for the chopping block that enriches the lawmakers with powers so vast they are getting away with
murder using twisted allegations that financially enrich the freemason political and legal perverts as well as satisfying their insatiable appetite for youngsters stolen by the most sinister abuse of the law. Laws they make up as they go along.

Zionist Miliband, Feminist Harman and femiman Clegg

Self-righteous. Narrow-minded. A mouthpiece for the unions...
Blistering attack on The Fawcett Society by its former vice chair Joanne Cash

Regretful: Joanne Cash says the Fawcett Society's furious reaction to MoS revelations reinforces her view that the feminist organisation has to change
Despite a long history of fighting to improve the lot of women in British life, The Fawcett Society, Britain’s oldest feminist organisation, has never been ‘water cooler’ conversation.
Until, that is, the events of the last two weeks, when T-shirts bearing the words ‘This is what a feminist looks like’ attracted exactly the wrong sort of attention.

Faced with the facts – revealed by The Mail on Sunday– that the shirts had been cheaply produced by exploiting female workers in Mauritius, The Fawcett Society then damaged its reputation still further with a self-righteous yet evasive response, suggesting that the workers’ pay (62 pence an hour) was reasonable and that the T-shirts somehow remained ethical.
When any organisation publicly abandons its core values, it is time for a rethink – the more so when, in the case of The Fawcett Society, it has been fatally undermined by an aggressive and immature culture of political point-scoring.
I take a personal interest in The Fawcett Society and, as a former vice chair, I felt a lot of sympathy when the story first broke.

Yet their persistent refusal to acknowledge the facts as they emerged has left me dismayed.
The society takes its name from one of our greatest feminists, Millicent Fawcett – one of my heroes. Not only did she campaign tirelessly for the vote for women, she dedicated her life to increasing female access to education and justice and the abolition of sexual abuse.
Sadly, by the time I was offered the role of vice chair in the spring of 2013, The Fawcett Society had already been displaced as the most significant feminist voice in the UK.

New campaigns with fresh approaches were leading the way – campaigns for better representation on company boards, for example, or attempts to highlight the daily abuse of women.
The tone and content feels different, modern.

In comparison, The Fawcett Society appears narrow in its focus – and reliant on union funding.
While the public is increasingly disenchanted by party politics, The Fawcett Society continues to be combative.
Rather than appearing to speak for everywoman, it has become pigeon-holed as Left-wing, as a mouthpiece for the unions.
The issues it stands for – equal pay, women in poverty – are as vital as ever, but Fawcett makes them sound tired.
Yet, with such a strong and intellectual history, I believed that it could evolve.

When I, as an active Conservative, was appointed to the board, it gave me confidence that change was possible.
What I found instead was an office full of ideological but naive young women driving a Left-wing agenda, even while the charity was on its knees.
It became apparent that some members of the staff had no idea how to run the charity, let alone grow it.

Bright women with a good eye for statistics, I am unconvinced to this day that they have any vision for the future of the charity beyond more of the same narrow focus, the same reactive, outspoken press performances.
When David Cameron reshuffled his Cabinet and increased the number of female full Cabinet Ministers from three to five, promoting a range of talented women to senior positions, I thought that surely The Fawcett Society would reach out across party lines and congratulate these women on their achievements.
But no, they couldn’t resist the old game: ‘The substance didn’t live up to the hype’, they said. Cameron had ‘failed’ to meet his promise to make a third of his Cabinet women by the time of the Election.

(A complete falsehood: One third of the Conservative members of the Coalition Cabinet were, in fact, women. But not even the Prime Minister can conjure up female Lib Dems.)
So with huge regret, I decided that I could not continue as vice chair as I no longer believed that the change needed could take place within the existing culture. And I stepped down.
I wasn’t at all surprised to see that Left-wing politicians were being used to promote the T-shirt, but I was dismayed.

If your potential supporters hate mainstream politicians, why identify yourself with them? Why do you need Ed Miliband when you’ve got Benedict Cumberbatch? Using the T-shirt to raise money and profile was a terrific idea but yet again the point-scoring had derailed a smart source of funding.
Fawcett’s response to this story has reinforced my view that it has still to change.
In an indignant fury, the charity – along with high street retailer Whistles, with whom it has aligned itself – defended the abuse of some of the world’s most vulnerable women.
This is still the stated position on the website at the time of writing.

So where does the charity go from here? There is a place for a serious feminist voice in the UK. The Fawcett Society could be that voice if it returned to the values of its founder and learned how to build coalitions and consensus. It needs to be representative of all women.
I have no doubt that Millicent Fawcett would be making the case for the protection of the girls of Rotherham. She would also by now have helped us re-engage with men. Some of her greatest feminist allies were men, including her husband Henry Fawcett and the philosopher John Stuart Mill.
Many of the changes now needed to progress real equality for women require society to release men from stereotypes and conventions too.
How can we share family obligations when men face stigma for taking time off work?

That is just one example of the many changes we should fight for. There is more momentum behind the equality movement now than there has been for a long time.
After the T-shirt story broke, someone on Fawcett’s staff wrote a sarcastic tweet in response to the T-shirt story: ‘We’ll just have to get along without the 11 million Mail readers. Aw, shucks.’
Possibly they can do that but equality cannot to be so narrowly selective. The Fawcett Society needs to decide what it is about.

Flustered Harman in a sweat over 'slave labour'

Harriet Harman last week continued to back the controversial Whistles feminist T-shirt, despite MoS revelations that it was produced by women in Mauritius paid just 62p an hour.
The Labour deputy leader, who wore the T-shirt at Prime Minister’s Questions in the Commons, wrongly claimed that The Fawcett Society had conducted an ‘investigation’ into the T-shirts ‘after that accusation was made about slave labour’.
In fact, The Fawcett Society has admitted it has yet to investigate the £45 T-shirts and the Mail on Sunday report mentioned nothing about ‘slave labour’, instead reporting a union leader’s view that the migrant workers’ low pay and cramped living conditions constituted a ‘sweatshop’.
Whistles said they intend to send someone to Mauritius to investigate our report.

Ms Harman seemed flustered on London’s LBC radio when presenter Iain Dale asked: ‘The people were paid 62p an hour – what would you call that, if it wasn’t slave labour?’
She replied: ‘Well, I, you know, I wasn’t involved in actually… I’m totally against slave labour… erm, but actually, if an organisation which is a charity promoting women’s rights give me a T-shirt to wear, I don’t, you know, look into all the background of how it was made, you know, I take it on trust.’
Ms Harman’s spokesperson declined to comment yesterday.

When men are married to women who scream like you, they just want to die sooner! VIDEO

Much more on female entitlement

Why Feminism Needs to End: It's Time to Work Towards Equality

Tackling feminism in today's world is -I'm told- rather a stupid idea. It's not that I'd be labelled a chauvinist pig and accused of wanting to keep women chained to chores and childcare, which I don't. It's not even that tackling a global movement as one person (which is how it feels, despite a mass of men and women attempting the same) is like standing against a tsunami wearing speedos and a snorkel; I'm aware that every word will be pulled apart, angered messages will fill my inbox and I'll be accused of ignorance and sexism.

I've already, during initial research, acquired my first troll on my new Twitter account; I'm a "simple manbaby" apparently. The reason it's stupid for me to speak against feminism is simply because I have a penis...and the feminist does not accept a boy negatively commenting on the relevance or alleged prejudice of the feminist movement.

I know this. Had I, as a male, pitched articles in support of feminism, perhaps I'd have been commissioned alongside the published pro-feminism male writers. But time and again, as I approached relevant sections of publications that boast a feminist voice, I was informed by the female, feminist editors that my views were 'not suitable'. I know that's like a satanist asking to put an advert for a willing, virginal sacrifice on the local church's noticeboard, but that's exactly the problem. If the media belongs to feminism like the noticeboard belongs to the church, where can you make another argument? I won't say who the guardian of feminism is, because I'd very much like to write articles for them and don't want to be blacklisted for publicly calling them sexist. But I feel I'm correct in seeing that bias.

Also, polite conversation about feminism, with feminists, has invariably turned into my being ranted at. Apparently, the very fact I'm questioning feminism is because I'm a typical white male with all the privilege, no understanding of what it's like to be the victim in a sexist society and, therefore, have no right to question or challenge it. Even Emma Watson's speech at the UN saw feminists react in comment threads, saying that men should not have a say, despite her invitation.

Yet, here I am; I have my speedos and my snorkel. First, I'm sorry feminism had to exist in the first place. I'm sorry about the past where women, as capable and wonderful as my own mother, my sister and as capable and strong as I know my daughters will be, were made to feel inferior, robbed of choices and treated as objects to be used and abused. I applaud the achievements of those who fought to bring about change and know there are still issues to resolve.

But...yes, 'but'...this has gone far enough. The reason I stand here in my speedos is because there is a need. Women have faced and still face prejudice and inequality. Here's a fact, though: men do too. That men are not allowed to speak about the prejudice and inequality they face simply because they are men (and men, in generalised and historic terms, are not the victims of sexism) is just one ludicrous contradiction from feminists. That feminism apparently stands for 'equality' in order to be recognised as legitimate and politically correct, but does nothing to fight for the rights of separated fathers as equal parents, while advocating the social assumption that women are more emotionally bonded with their children based on gender stereotype, is just one transparent flaw, in the light of its own mission statement of equal rights.

In one post, I cannot scratch the surface of all the issues: the false propaganda, the resulting angered cry of women, the politically correct expectation upon men to pay their penance for misogyny with unchallenged acceptance of feminist values in their homes, ironically leaving them silenced and without a vote. But follow me, converse with me and read my future posts.

But here and now I'm not going to speak only on behalf of the men that I know are negatively affected by feminism. Indeed, the whole reason for my writing on the subject is because I actually care about gender equality, which is something I do not credit to feminism, or at least, what feminism has become. Women are feeling the sting too; women I care about.
A recent study by Netmums found the majority of women felt feminism was too aggressive, de-valued the stay at home mum and applied too much pressure on women to do and be everything. 17% even stated it is oppressive to men.

Women, actually, get a rough ride from feminism's soapbox rantings. There are standards to live up to, much like a Christian having to obey the 10 commandments or feel like a sinner. I have spoken to feminists and witnessed their despair as they defend their own life choices against what their feminist values dictate they should be or do. One, who prioritised her children over work, felt she let down her values as a feminist and felt pressured to work full-time. She spent ten minutes justifying her reasons for not doing so...not that I had challenged her.
Another became exacerbated when stating she didn't "believe in high heels" because they symbolised the oppression of male objectification and her feminist values dictated she shouldn't wear them simply because a 'man' would like her to or because she should rely on a pair of high heels to make her attractive. She continued, taking both sides of conversation, making it clear she likes to wear them occasionally because it makes her feel good, for her, not for anyone else, it's not for a 'man', she has a right to wear them and shouldn't have to dress down simply to avoid being objectified...it went on. Bizarrely, all she was trying to do was feel justified in wearing something she liked and escape the judgement from feminists who would say she gave in by wearing them and the other feminists who would say she gave in by wearing flats. The 'man' was actually absent in this argument, apart from serving as the silent 'accused' and 'guilty'.

Women: go out and work, put up your own shelves, make him look after the children, you don't have to cook. Be strong, be capable, make your own decisions and be autonomous. Feminism is dogmatic. It sets rules. Like a religion it praises particular behaviour, but there are too many denominations, with no central scripture. Under the umbrella label of feminism the message is mixed, destructive and confusing. The result is that wearing one flat shoe and one heel, feminism simply walks in circles.

Feminism casts out the old gender roles of both men and women as outdated and primitive, promoting the working, confident, strong woman as 'progressive' and the stay at home mother and wife as a woman who is 'socialised' into an inferior lifestyle of old. Women are free, only, to choose feminism's idea of the 'equal woman' in this new world; it has sculpted its own idea of the perfect gender roles and is socialising both sexes into playing these 'acceptable' roles in society. The odd result is that women have more choice, but only feel allowed to choose that which is deemed acceptable, according to the stereotype of the all new and improved modern woman.
Going back to the current plight of the male, it's easy to see that feminism pushes women toward choosing and living a particular role in society, whether they like it or not. Women are to choose to work, choose a reversed gender role in parenting. Choose, choose, choose. After all those years of oppression, women have the right to choose and should do so!

Two questions:

If the woman in a relationship has the power of choice awarded to her by feminism, what power does the man, her partner, have?

Is this equality?

Simply acknowledging that if women have the authority to choose, then men don't, is a step forward because it becomes glaringly obvious that the feminist agenda will not bring about equality. Men are now having to fight for their own power, even to speak. There are issues of inequality on either side and they will not be resolved if men are fighting for men and women are fighting for women. A tug of war is not over until one team has fallen into the muddy ditch in the middle. That's not equality. HeForShe? That's about men fighting for women on the assumption -and outdated notion- that women are the only ones suffering gender inequality, which isn't even a stab in the right direction.
Perhaps we all need to grow up and realise that within our society, we can collectively, as united men and women, set a standard that is fair for all. I know feminism doesn't speak for all women. I know feminism actually makes it difficult for many women. I know feminism does not allow men to voice their opinions.

So, to the women and men in our society who actually want equality, I would like to extend your formal invitation. Gender equality, prejudice and crime against anyone of any gender, is your issue too.
We need to end the tug of war, put down the rope and come to the table as equals and tackle prejudice and crime together. That is the campaign where men and women stand side by side and decide what type of society we can make, acknowledging each other's flaws, faults, strengths and where we each feel we suffer prejudice from the other. Such a campaign does not begin with one side 'allowing' the other to join. Neither does its name imply one side should fight only for the rights of the other. "HeForShe"? I'd call it "AllForEquality".